Once again, the folks in Congress are trying to create a “national language” out of English. On the face of it, this seems pretty benign. Who can argue that citizens in the United States should be able to participate in the larger community, to hear and respond to positions and arguments made by various parties. Boy, that sounds good.
Then, the practicality of application rears its ugly head. Just what does it mean that English is the United States’ national language? If we treat ability to speak/understand English as a condition of naturalization; does this mean that we have to give English proficiency exams to prospective citizens? And, how do we measure that proficiency? What does “proficient in English” mean? Is reading/writing good enough? what about deaf people that “speak” using sign language? Or, is it a writing proficiency? Those who have studied foreign languages know that proficiencies in reading/writing are different than proficiencies in listening/speaking. Just what is enough?
And, what about other issues? Does this affect how government signs are done? Would it be legal for a sign to be printing in a language other than English?
Other than nationalist rah-rah, I can’t help wondering what Congress is trying to achieve with this type of legislation.
Remember Me
© Copyright 2009 Bill Rapoza Theme Design by Bryan Bell newtelligence dasBlog 1.8.5223.0 || | Page rendered at 1/6/2009 8:56:07 PM (Pacific Standard Time, UTC-08:00) Pick a theme: BlogXP calmBlue Candid Blue dasBlog Discreet Blog Blue Elegante essence Just Html Mono Movable Radio Blue Movable Radio Heat orangeCream Portal Slate Sound Waves Tricoleur